Finally 16 year olds are on the national agenda on a host of issues - and the beauty of this debate is that we are at cahoots whether they should be getting more rights, other roles and further responsibilities - I must admit, this is music to my ears! 

In this article I will be focusing my reflections on whether the consent for sexual relationships should be pushed down to 16 years of age.

If truth be told, many people still perceive young people as being the decadence and debauchery of our society with the usual moral panic button being pressed fixatedly.  But it still is virtuous to hear politicians and commentators talking about 16 year olds, trying to understand, even if it is one of those issues that bamboozle our society, how young people think in terms of sex at what 'we' consider as being an 'impressionable' age.  But the mistaken thing to do is to set down all 16 year olds in one basket because there is no way that 16 year olds subscribe to one homogenous cluster.

In all truth, one generation after another we have tried to be au fait with young people's sexual encounters.  For ever there existed this outlook that youth are amoral, immature and impulsive when it comes to sexual behavour and hence the need for strict legislative protection. 

As we coast into a post-modern society it makes it even more difficult for the community to keep tabs on what young people are doing and saying and hence the moral panic.  This makes 'us' rather scratchy and abrasive towards new-fangled lifestyles. 

Whilst some ten, fifteen or possibly twenty years ago it was comparatively easy to herd young people into youth centers flushing into-them guilt feelings from the first to the last minute they spend on site, controlling relationships, monitoring behavior and putting on the spot anyone who dares think of 'doing it' at sixteen.  How can we dregs of Gen X think clear when adults patrolled each corner of our improvised discos and it was only with some luck that we managed to get hold of each other's hips as we swung left to right with the emblematic glitter ball throwing colorful rays all around and the stroboscope making us look like robots as we move to the ABBA and Bee Gees beat.

Let's face it, the lack of control that middle aged people have on young people injects in 'them' a state of alarm.  It has always been like that and probably will not really change much in generations to come.

Dr Godfrey Farrugia, MP, family doctor and Whip on the Government's side has rightly so re-ignited the debate around sexual consent.  The Opposition seems happy to have this debate as well from what I gather.  Even though this shouldn't automatically mean we need to change things to appease the Europeans, we are practically all alone in the EU.  All others consider it legal for people to have sexual encounters at 16 years of age or less (with the anomaly that in Malta we already allow marriage at this same age perceptibly with parental consent. 

Some are arguing that it is high time that this issue is sorted out as we need to get ourselves aligned with modern Europe.  Experts both legal and medical in Malta have spoken about the positives of having the age of consent pushed down to 16 years.  Recently during the TV discussion programme Xarabank even Bishop Scicluna seemed to favor this position affirming that we need to be sure the checks and balances are in place.

However, these 'yes-no' positions bother me in extremis as they risk trivializing and simplifying a very complex debate.  The matter at hand is much more multifaceted.  Beyond the morality we need to read into the details. 

The truth is that the empirical research that has been presented on this issue at local level so far is not compelling.  We could do with data that is not just looking into acuity but understanding actual behavior and lifestyle. 

There is also the complex issue of whether amending the law and accepting that young people have sexual relationships is something that should be led by politicians or whether it should be a debate that is taking place amongst experts in youth studies, counselors, therapists, medical professionals and legislators in close assembly with young people themselves. 

This does not just concern young people but is also about a transformation in the way we do our formal and informal education, about the skills needed by educators, pharmacists and parents, it is about improving our medical services in terms of GU clinics and therapists amongst other.

We also need to strengthen legislation that will protect young people from potential adult abuse because we need to admit that there are predators out there and that such a change in the law will make it increasingly difficult to prove wrong doing.  In the UK and the US we have repeatedly read about circumstances that surface relationships that are happening between teachers and their students for example. 

The role of politicians is to raise this issue on the national agenda. 

Now it needs to be taken away from their hands and left for experts and young people themselves to balance out the pros and cons, examine the current laws, understand the morality and ethics behind the possible scenarios and see the wider implications of such a decision on the lifestyle and transitions that young people at that age are going through. 

Only then will it be the turn of the politicians to take the decision and legislate accordingly.  Forcing the debate would be wrong but letting it pass like water under a bridge is terribly unfair.  

 

Dr Andrew Azzopardi

Senior Lecturer, Department of Youth and Community Studies

Faculty for Social Wellbeing, University of Malta

&

Broadcaster - Ghandi xi Nghid 

www.andrewazzopardi.org